Lord Victor
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2019
- Messages
- 143
- Likes
- 99
The Quest:
I'm calling on the aid of any engineering masterminds that might be in here, to explain what I suppose could be brushed off as anecdotal (given that I don't have the equipment or knowhow to effectively experiments with/test this in a material way), but none the less here goes - as this has been bugging me for a long while!
I've been looking for a new amp for a long while, and had first set my sights on a Hypex (Nad M22) based amp, and the natural progression was the Purifi once released. Both appeared to sound clean, clear and precise, without becoming "grainy, cold or clinical" as class D has been accused of in the past (excuse the silly audiophile terminology).
I had the chance to compare a handful of Class D amps a while ago, including a Hypex nCore (Nad M10), Purifi's Eval Amp (in their own red enclosure), along with a black sheep, a Pascal L-Pro2s - this against my own amps, mainly older AB designs.
Now the Purifi's reputation is already legendary for its technical specifications and measurements - low distortion, high damping factor, etc., although arguable somewhat marginal, but not insignificant in improvement over the nCore circuit. The Pascal is an OEM only, pro audio amp, used in high end studio monitors etc., best known for its efficiency and on board power supply - not seen or used in any hifi products to my knowledge.
The 'Issue' in listening:
Upon listening, first comparing the nCore to the Purifi, the lineage was clear: they sounded quite similar, with the Purify just sounding very slightly "more", so to speak; a bit more precision, detail, etc. all the usual, and slightly more of the same tonal character, slightly warmer, for lack of a better word. Overall both were good, but I could tell that the Purifi was the "improved" version of the nCore basically.
Now the Pascal turned out to be a suprise: It sounded brighter/more sterile, but ran absolute circles around the purifi in every area other than "tonality" or "musicality" (what ever you want to call it, the purifi sounded warmer). Everything sounded MUCH more precise on the Pascal, to the point where on tracks like "Trentemoller - Chameleon" or "Vestbo Trio - Mudlide" the bass line sounded muffled and soft on the Purifi, where as on the Pascal it sounded clearly defined, controlled and had much more "physical" punch to it, which also translated to more precise sense of imaging/space and generally just clearer transients.
Now just to check if it was my own lunacy/bias whatever you want to call it, or my room or speakers, I tested it in multiple systems, and had numerous people listen, without telling them what I was switching or what they were listening for, all with the same impressions of the results (though preferences differed).
Why do I care, you might ask?
I can't decide which I should go for, as both have ups and downs: Apparant tonality vs technicality. So I want to know which is technically objectively correct; if the Pascal's technical precision is a psychoacoustic artefact of some distortion, like one might experience with a bright sounding loudspeaker, sounding more detailed, but actually just highlighting transients through an unnatural peak in the treble, or whether the Purifi is in fact "slower" somehow, fx. if the high amounts of feedback are causing some sort of time domain issues - as I've often experienced a similar sense of "soft" transients with other amps, that I later learned used feedback designs.
Data/Measurements/Objective proof:
There are plenty of differences to be found between the amps in their datasheets - they might by many be considered "insignificant" or small enough that they shouldn't matter - but given how evident the audible differences were, even to uninitiated listeners I subjected to these, I'd personally say its safe to say that something in there is significant -the question is what?
Data sheets for both amps are readily available:
Purifi Amp Modules
The Pascal Data Sheet can be found under the Downloads tap on the product page:
Pascal Amp Module
Test Equipment:
Amps: Purifi, Pascal L-Pro2s, NAD M10 (nCore), Thule IA100, Pioneer M90, Argon SA1, Klank, NCore Eval Monoblocks (briefly).
Pre: NAD M10, MM Audio Pre, Questyle CMA800b
Dac: Lavry DA10, NAD M10, Astell & Kern AK240
Speakers: JBL Ti10k, Dynaudio Confidence 30, Monitor Audio Platinum PL100, Infinity Kappa 6.2i and a prototype.
I'm calling on the aid of any engineering masterminds that might be in here, to explain what I suppose could be brushed off as anecdotal (given that I don't have the equipment or knowhow to effectively experiments with/test this in a material way), but none the less here goes - as this has been bugging me for a long while!
I've been looking for a new amp for a long while, and had first set my sights on a Hypex (Nad M22) based amp, and the natural progression was the Purifi once released. Both appeared to sound clean, clear and precise, without becoming "grainy, cold or clinical" as class D has been accused of in the past (excuse the silly audiophile terminology).
I had the chance to compare a handful of Class D amps a while ago, including a Hypex nCore (Nad M10), Purifi's Eval Amp (in their own red enclosure), along with a black sheep, a Pascal L-Pro2s - this against my own amps, mainly older AB designs.
Now the Purifi's reputation is already legendary for its technical specifications and measurements - low distortion, high damping factor, etc., although arguable somewhat marginal, but not insignificant in improvement over the nCore circuit. The Pascal is an OEM only, pro audio amp, used in high end studio monitors etc., best known for its efficiency and on board power supply - not seen or used in any hifi products to my knowledge.
The 'Issue' in listening:
Upon listening, first comparing the nCore to the Purifi, the lineage was clear: they sounded quite similar, with the Purify just sounding very slightly "more", so to speak; a bit more precision, detail, etc. all the usual, and slightly more of the same tonal character, slightly warmer, for lack of a better word. Overall both were good, but I could tell that the Purifi was the "improved" version of the nCore basically.
Now the Pascal turned out to be a suprise: It sounded brighter/more sterile, but ran absolute circles around the purifi in every area other than "tonality" or "musicality" (what ever you want to call it, the purifi sounded warmer). Everything sounded MUCH more precise on the Pascal, to the point where on tracks like "Trentemoller - Chameleon" or "Vestbo Trio - Mudlide" the bass line sounded muffled and soft on the Purifi, where as on the Pascal it sounded clearly defined, controlled and had much more "physical" punch to it, which also translated to more precise sense of imaging/space and generally just clearer transients.
Now just to check if it was my own lunacy/bias whatever you want to call it, or my room or speakers, I tested it in multiple systems, and had numerous people listen, without telling them what I was switching or what they were listening for, all with the same impressions of the results (though preferences differed).
Why do I care, you might ask?
I can't decide which I should go for, as both have ups and downs: Apparant tonality vs technicality. So I want to know which is technically objectively correct; if the Pascal's technical precision is a psychoacoustic artefact of some distortion, like one might experience with a bright sounding loudspeaker, sounding more detailed, but actually just highlighting transients through an unnatural peak in the treble, or whether the Purifi is in fact "slower" somehow, fx. if the high amounts of feedback are causing some sort of time domain issues - as I've often experienced a similar sense of "soft" transients with other amps, that I later learned used feedback designs.
Data/Measurements/Objective proof:
There are plenty of differences to be found between the amps in their datasheets - they might by many be considered "insignificant" or small enough that they shouldn't matter - but given how evident the audible differences were, even to uninitiated listeners I subjected to these, I'd personally say its safe to say that something in there is significant -the question is what?
Data sheets for both amps are readily available:
Purifi Amp Modules
The Pascal Data Sheet can be found under the Downloads tap on the product page:
Pascal Amp Module
Test Equipment:
Amps: Purifi, Pascal L-Pro2s, NAD M10 (nCore), Thule IA100, Pioneer M90, Argon SA1, Klank, NCore Eval Monoblocks (briefly).
Pre: NAD M10, MM Audio Pre, Questyle CMA800b
Dac: Lavry DA10, NAD M10, Astell & Kern AK240
Speakers: JBL Ti10k, Dynaudio Confidence 30, Monitor Audio Platinum PL100, Infinity Kappa 6.2i and a prototype.
Last edited: